Background and Objectives: The Fractional Flow Reserve and Intravascular UltrasoundGuided Intervention Strategy for Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Intermediate Stenosis (FLAVOUR) trial demonstrated non-inferiority of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided PCI. We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of FFR-guided PCI compared to IVUS-guided PCI in Korea. Methods: A 2-part cost-effectiveness model, composed of a short-term decision tree model and a long-term Markov model, was developed for patients who underwent PCI to treat intermediate stenosis (40% to 70% stenosis by visual estimation on coronary angiography).The lifetime healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated from the healthcare system perspective. Transition probabilities were mainly referred from the FLAVOUR trial, and healthcare costs were mainly obtained through analysis of Korean National Health Insurance claims data. Health utilities were mainly obtained from the Seattle Angina Questionnaire responses of FLAVOUR trial participants mapped to EQ-5D. Results: From the Korean healthcare system perspective, the base-case analysis showed that FFR-guided PCI was 2,451 U.S. dollar lower in lifetime healthcare costs and 0.178 higher in QALYs compared to IVUS-guided PCI. FFR-guided PCI remained more likely to be cost-effective over a wide range of willingness-to-pay thresholds in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Conclusions Based on the results from the FLAVOUR trial, FFR-guided PCI is projected to decrease lifetime healthcare costs and increase QALYs compared with IVUS-guided PCI in intermediate coronary lesion, and it is a dominant strategy in Korea.

Background and Objectives: The Fractional Flow Reserve and Intravascular UltrasoundGuided Intervention Strategy for Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Intermediate Stenosis (FLAVOUR) trial demonstrated non-inferiority of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided PCI. We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of FFR-guided PCI compared to IVUS-guided PCI in Korea. Methods: A 2-part cost-effectiveness model, composed of a short-term decision tree model and a long-term Markov model, was developed for patients who underwent PCI to treat intermediate stenosis (40% to 70% stenosis by visual estimation on coronary angiography).The lifetime healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated from the healthcare system perspective. Transition probabilities were mainly referred from the FLAVOUR trial, and healthcare costs were mainly obtained through analysis of Korean National Health Insurance claims data. Health utilities were mainly obtained from the Seattle Angina Questionnaire responses of FLAVOUR trial participants mapped to EQ-5D. Results: From the Korean healthcare system perspective, the base-case analysis showed that FFR-guided PCI was 2,451 U.S. dollar lower in lifetime healthcare costs and 0.178 higher in QALYs compared to IVUS-guided PCI. FFR-guided PCI remained more likely to be cost-effective over a wide range of willingness-to-pay thresholds in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Conclusions Based on the results from the FLAVOUR trial, FFR-guided PCI is projected to decrease lifetime healthcare costs and increase QALYs compared with IVUS-guided PCI in intermediate coronary lesion, and it is a dominant strategy in Korea.

Background and Objectives: The Fractional Flow Reserve and Intravascular UltrasoundGuided Intervention Strategy for Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Intermediate Stenosis (FLAVOUR) trial demonstrated non-inferiority of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided PCI. We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of FFR-guided PCI compared to IVUS-guided PCI in Korea. Methods: A 2-part cost-effectiveness model, composed of a short-term decision tree model and a long-term Markov model, was developed for patients who underwent PCI to treat intermediate stenosis (40% to 70% stenosis by visual estimation on coronary angiography).The lifetime healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated from the healthcare system perspective. Transition probabilities were mainly referred from the FLAVOUR trial, and healthcare costs were mainly obtained through analysis of Korean National Health Insurance claims data. Health utilities were mainly obtained from the Seattle Angina Questionnaire responses of FLAVOUR trial participants mapped to EQ-5D. Results: From the Korean healthcare system perspective, the base-case analysis showed that FFR-guided PCI was 2,451 U.S. dollar lower in lifetime healthcare costs and 0.178 higher in QALYs compared to IVUS-guided PCI. FFR-guided PCI remained more likely to be cost-effective over a wide range of willingness-to-pay thresholds in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Conclusions Based on the results from the FLAVOUR trial, FFR-guided PCI is projected to decrease lifetime healthcare costs and increase QALYs compared with IVUS-guided PCI in intermediate coronary lesion, and it is a dominant strategy in Korea.

Background and Objectives: The Fractional Flow Reserve and Intravascular UltrasoundGuided Intervention Strategy for Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Intermediate Stenosis (FLAVOUR) trial demonstrated non-inferiority of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided PCI. We sought to investigate the cost-effectiveness of FFR-guided PCI compared to IVUS-guided PCI in Korea. Methods: A 2-part cost-effectiveness model, composed of a short-term decision tree model and a long-term Markov model, was developed for patients who underwent PCI to treat intermediate stenosis (40% to 70% stenosis by visual estimation on coronary angiography).The lifetime healthcare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were estimated from the healthcare system perspective. Transition probabilities were mainly referred from the FLAVOUR trial, and healthcare costs were mainly obtained through analysis of Korean National Health Insurance claims data. Health utilities were mainly obtained from the Seattle Angina Questionnaire responses of FLAVOUR trial participants mapped to EQ-5D. Results: From the Korean healthcare system perspective, the base-case analysis showed that FFR-guided PCI was 2,451 U.S. dollar lower in lifetime healthcare costs and 0.178 higher in QALYs compared to IVUS-guided PCI. FFR-guided PCI remained more likely to be cost-effective over a wide range of willingness-to-pay thresholds in the probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Conclusions Based on the results from the FLAVOUR trial, FFR-guided PCI is projected to decrease lifetime healthcare costs and increase QALYs compared with IVUS-guided PCI in intermediate coronary lesion, and it is a dominant strategy in Korea.

Background and Objectives: Angiographic assessment of coronary stenosis severity using quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) is often inconsistent with that based on fractional flow reserve (FFR) or intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). We investigated the incidence of discrepancies between QCA and FFR or IVUS, and the outcomes of FFR- and IVUS-guided strategies in discordant coronary lesions. Methods: This study was a post-hoc analysis of the FLAVOUR study. We used a QCA-derived diameter stenosis (DS) of 60% or greater, the highest tertile, to classify coronary lesions as concordant or discordant with FFR or IVUS criteria for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO) was defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization at 24 months. Results: The discordance rate between QCA and FFR or IVUS was 30.2% (n=551). The QCAFFR discordance rate was numerically lower than the QCA-IVUS discordance rate (28.2% vs. 32.4%, p=0.050). In 200 patients with ≥60% DS, PCI was deferred according to negative FFR (n=141) and negative IVUS (n=59) (15.3% vs. 6.5%, p<0.001). The POCO incidence was comparable between the FFR- and IVUS-guided deferral strategies (5.9% vs. 3.4%, p=0.479).Conversely, 351 patients with DS <60% underwent PCI according to positive FFR (n=118) and positive IVUS (n=233) (12.8% vs. 25.9%, p<0.001). FFR- and IVUS-guided PCI did not differ in the incidence of POCO (9.5% vs. 6.5%, p=0.294). Conclusions The proportion of QCA-FFR or IVUS discordance was approximately one third for intermediate coronary lesions. FFR- or IVUS-guided strategies for these lesions were comparable with respect to POCO at 24 months.

Recent advances in robotics technology and artificial intelligence (AI) have sparked increased interest in humanoid robots that resemble humans and social robots capable of interacting socially. Alongside this trend, a new field of robot research called human-robot interaction (HRI) is gaining prominence. The aim of this review paper is to introduce the fundamental concepts of HRI and social robots, examine their current applications in the medical field, and discuss the current and future prospects of HRI and social robots in spinal care. HRI is an interdisciplinary field where robotics, AI, social sciences, design, and various disciplines collaborate organically to develop robots that successfully interact with humans as the ultimate goal. While social robots are not yet widely deployed in clinical environments, ongoing HRI research encompasses various areas such as nursing and caregiving support, social and emotional assistance, rehabilitation and cognitive enhancement for the elderly, medical information provision and education, as well as patient monitoring and data collection. Although still in its early stages, research related to spinal care includes studies on robotic support for rehabilitation exercises, assistance in gait training, and questionnaire-based assessments for spinal pain. Future applications of social robots in spinal care will require diverse HRI research efforts and active involvement from spinal specialists.

Recent advances in robotics technology and artificial intelligence (AI) have sparked increased interest in humanoid robots that resemble humans and social robots capable of interacting socially. Alongside this trend, a new field of robot research called human-robot interaction (HRI) is gaining prominence. The aim of this review paper is to introduce the fundamental concepts of HRI and social robots, examine their current applications in the medical field, and discuss the current and future prospects of HRI and social robots in spinal care. HRI is an interdisciplinary field where robotics, AI, social sciences, design, and various disciplines collaborate organically to develop robots that successfully interact with humans as the ultimate goal. While social robots are not yet widely deployed in clinical environments, ongoing HRI research encompasses various areas such as nursing and caregiving support, social and emotional assistance, rehabilitation and cognitive enhancement for the elderly, medical information provision and education, as well as patient monitoring and data collection. Although still in its early stages, research related to spinal care includes studies on robotic support for rehabilitation exercises, assistance in gait training, and questionnaire-based assessments for spinal pain. Future applications of social robots in spinal care will require diverse HRI research efforts and active involvement from spinal specialists.

Recent advances in robotics technology and artificial intelligence (AI) have sparked increased interest in humanoid robots that resemble humans and social robots capable of interacting socially. Alongside this trend, a new field of robot research called human-robot interaction (HRI) is gaining prominence. The aim of this review paper is to introduce the fundamental concepts of HRI and social robots, examine their current applications in the medical field, and discuss the current and future prospects of HRI and social robots in spinal care. HRI is an interdisciplinary field where robotics, AI, social sciences, design, and various disciplines collaborate organically to develop robots that successfully interact with humans as the ultimate goal. While social robots are not yet widely deployed in clinical environments, ongoing HRI research encompasses various areas such as nursing and caregiving support, social and emotional assistance, rehabilitation and cognitive enhancement for the elderly, medical information provision and education, as well as patient monitoring and data collection. Although still in its early stages, research related to spinal care includes studies on robotic support for rehabilitation exercises, assistance in gait training, and questionnaire-based assessments for spinal pain. Future applications of social robots in spinal care will require diverse HRI research efforts and active involvement from spinal specialists.

Background/Aims: Long-term use of acid suppressants such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine 2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) has been associated with the risk of osteoporotic fracture. Acid suppressants and muco-protective agents (MPAs) are often used together as anti-ulcer agents. We evaluated the association between the risk of osteoporotic fracture and the combined use of these anti-peptic agents. Methods: A population-based case-control study was conducted by analyzing the Korean National Health Insurance Data from 2014 to 2020. Patients who had been prescribed anti-peptic agents, such as PPI, H2RA, or MPA, were included. Considering the incidence of osteoporotic fractures, the case group (n = 14,704) and control group (n = 58,816) were classified by 1:4 matching based on age and sex. Results: The use of all types of anti-peptic agents was associated with an increased risk of osteoporotic fractures (PPI: hazard osteoratio [HR], 1.31; H2RA: HR, 1.44; and MPA: HR, 1.33; all p < 0.001). Compared to PPI alone, the combined use of “PPI and H2RA” (HR, 1.58; p = 0.010) as well as “PPI, H2RA, and MPA” (HR, 1.71; p = 0.001) was associated with an increased risk of osteoporotic fracture. However, compared with PPI alone, “MPA and PPI or H2RA” was not associated with an increased risk of osteoporotic fracture. Conclusions This study found that the combined use of “PPI and H2RA” was associated with a higher risk of osteoporotic fractures. In cases where deemed necessary, the physicians may initially consider prescribing the combination use of MPA.

Background/Aims: Mucoprotective agents, such as eupatilin, are often prescribed to prevent gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding in addition to an acid suppressant despite the absence of a large-scale study. We evaluated the additional effect of eupatilin on the prevention of GI bleeding in both the upper and lower GI tract in concomitant aspirin and acid suppressant users using the nationwide database of national claims data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS). Methods: An aspirin cohort was constructed using the NHIS claims data from 2013 to 2020. Patients who manifested with hematemesis, melena, or hematochezia were considered to have GI bleeding. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to determine the risk factors for GI bleeding associated with the concomitant use of GI drugs and other covariates among aspirin users. Results: Overall, a total of 432,208 aspirin users were included. The concurrent use of an acid suppressant and eupatilin (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.85, p = 0.016, vs. acid suppressant only) was a statistically significant preventive factor for GI bleeding. Moreover, a more than 3-month duration (HR = 0.88, p = 0.030) of acid suppressant and eupatilin prescription (vs. acid suppressant only) was a statistically significant preventive factor for GI bleeding. Conclusions Eupatilin administration for ≥ 3 months showed additional preventive effect on GI bleeding in concomitant aspirin and acid suppressant users. Thus, cotreatment with eupatilin with a duration of 3 months or longer is recommended for reducing GI bleeding among aspirin plus acid suppressant users.